Personally, having been a member of this site for so many years. Having had time periods where I post and don't, off and on. I've come to believe that moderation needs to be looser in Non-Aviation. For example in the Non-Av 'Brittney Griner' thread:

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1475497

Viewing it today after Friday 8/5, so much context and discussion is just gone.

You do have historically a lot of big personalities in Non-Aviation, and views solidly left and right.

I just think it's extreme to delete so much of what was good conversation just because some rules got bent. No one was cussing each other out. Why should so much good information be deleted in the name of "rules"?

I have respect for the job the moderators have to do, even if I have brushed up on them in the past, I just think it is a bit overzealous in Non-Aviation specifically.

Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.

dutchspotter1 wrote:

Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.

Where have you been on this site? Non-Av has been robust for literally decades.

Pellegrine wrote:

Personally, having been a member of this site for so many years. Having had time periods where I post and don't, off and on. I've come to believe that moderation needs to be looser in Non-Aviation. For example in the Non-Av 'Brittney Griner' thread:

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1475497

Viewing it today after Friday 8/5, so much context and discussion is just gone.

You do have historically a lot of big personalities in Non-Aviation, and views solidly left and right.

I just think it's extreme to delete so much of what was good conversation just because some rules got bent. No one was cussing each other out. Why should so much good information be deleted in the name of "rules"?

I have respect for the job the moderators have to do, even if I have brushed up on them in the past, I just think it is a bit overzealous in Non-Aviation specifically.

You can't make a flamebait and borderline off topic comment the way you did and expect us not to have to do something about it. Your comment appeared to have only been made in an attempt to bait American users, which is for obvious reasons against the rules. The portions of the discussion which were removed subsequent to that all stemmed from your comment, and frankly nothing removed detracted from the overall discussion. I had nothing to do with any of these deletions, but everything was done correctly by the moderators who did remove the comments.

You're free to put "rules" in quotations all you'd like, but they're still rules, and it's still your responsibility as a member of this community to abide by them. We already have pretty lax moderation of the Non Aviation Forum, but when comments like yours are made, and particularly when they're reported to us, we can't ignore it. It violates the rules on flamebait, and requires removal. That rule exists to maintain decorum in the forum, and it won't change. If your comment had been phrased in such a way to be critical without being flamebait, then it probably could have stayed up, but you didn't attempt to pull any punches, and it's clear to me that you were attempting to make a purposely controversial comment to stir the pot. Removing the comment is our only tool to keep the thread on topic and maintain a respectful atmosphere.

Aaron747 wrote:

dutchspotter1 wrote:

Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.

Where have you been on this site? Non-Av has been robust for literally decades.

I actually don't disagree with dutchspotter1. This always felt like a strange place to come to discuss things entirely unrelated to aviation. I think the Non Av forum used to have more of a fun and lighthearted atmosphere, but the dramatic increase in divisive political rhetoric in recent years has changed the makeup of the forum, in my opinion. I've long been a proponent of banning political discussion entirely, because it's frustrating to see the hateful things people will say to each other here. Not enough people agree with me to make that happen, and I respect that, but it remains a regular source of frustration to me. It would be a different story if everyone were willing to engage in constructive political conversations, but there are simply too many users injecting nasty comments and pointless rhetoric for me to handle.

atcsundevil wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

dutchspotter1 wrote:

Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.

Where have you been on this site? Non-Av has been robust for literally decades.

I actually don't disagree with dutchspotter1. This always felt like a strange place to come to discuss things entirely unrelated to aviation. I think the Non Av forum used to have more of a fun and lighthearted atmosphere, but the dramatic increase in divisive political rhetoric in recent years has changed the makeup of the forum, in my opinion. I've long been a proponent of banning political discussion entirely, because it's frustrating to see the hateful things people will say to each other here. Not enough people agree with me to make that happen, and I respect that, but it remains a regular source of frustration to me. It would be a different story if everyone were willing to engage in constructive political conversations, but there are simply too many users injecting nasty comments and pointless rhetoric for me to handle.

I agree with you. Not that it means anything.

Some of the topics are just to the point of why reply at all.

It has gotten really nasty with the fly-by trolling at a level that used to not exist.

cpd wrote:

I agree with you. Not that it means anything.

Some of the topics are just to the point of why reply at all.

It has gotten really nasty with the fly-by trolling at a level that used to not exist.

I just hate seeing the nastiness and disrespect. It's why I wanted to become a moderator in the first place — to at least attempt to reign some of that in. Unfortunately it's a losing battle, especially in the divisive political environment that's existed in recent years. So much of that bleeds over into the aviation forums, which I believe detracts from the spirit of this site. I feel like we're not supposed to be here to debate partisan politics, we're supposed to be here to talk about airplanes. Aviation and politics can become intertwined of course, but it just doesn't need the rhetoric and vitriol that are so often injected into discussions. I appreciate that the majority of users here do engage respectfully and are here for the right reasons, but the notorious minority seems to be trying awful hard to spoil the party for everyone else.

dutchspotter1 wrote:

Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.

I think this is a perfect example of a comment that take takes a thread off-topic. The topic of this thread is moderation of the non-av forum, not why that forum exists. If anything, this comment should have been moderated away, but as we can see above, the opposite has happened.

Having said that, I do appreciate the jobs the moderators do, especially in the non-av forum. I have learned that sometimes my post just disappears, especially when it is about a sensitive topic. You learn over time what those sensitive topics are and adjust your posts accordingly.

AeroVega wrote:

dutchspotter1 wrote:

Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.

I think this is a perfect example of a comment that take takes a thread off-topic. The topic of this thread is moderation of the non-av forum, not why that forum exists. If anything, this comment should have been moderated away, but as we can see above, the opposite has happened.

Having said that, I do appreciate the jobs the moderators do, especially in the non-av forum. I have learned that sometimes my post just disappears, especially when it is about a sensitive topic. You learn over time what those sensitive topics are and adjust your posts accordingly.

We don't remove posts in this forum unless we're forced to remove it, either for being massively off topic or too disrespectful to allow to stand. We don't just moderate away people expressing their opinions when it's at least reasonably related to the subject.

atcsundevil wrote:

AeroVega wrote:

dutchspotter1 wrote:

Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.

I think this is a perfect example of a comment that take takes a thread off-topic. The topic of this thread is moderation of the non-av forum, not why that forum exists. If anything, this comment should have been moderated away, but as we can see above, the opposite has happened.

Having said that, I do appreciate the jobs the moderators do, especially in the non-av forum. I have learned that sometimes my post just disappears, especially when it is about a sensitive topic. You learn over time what those sensitive topics are and adjust your posts accordingly.

We don't remove posts in this forum unless we're forced to remove it, either for being massively off topic or too disrespectful to allow to stand. We don't just moderate away people expressing their opinions when it's at least reasonably related to the subject.

Flamebait and borderline off-topic are the reasons for moderation, you told the the starter of this thread. The first response in this thread fits that description perfectly.

AeroVega wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

AeroVega wrote:

I think this is a perfect example of a comment that take takes a thread off-topic. The topic of this thread is moderation of the non-av forum, not why that forum exists. If anything, this comment should have been moderated away, but as we can see above, the opposite has happened.

Having said that, I do appreciate the jobs the moderators do, especially in the non-av forum. I have learned that sometimes my post just disappears, especially when it is about a sensitive topic. You learn over time what those sensitive topics are and adjust your posts accordingly.

We don't remove posts in this forum unless we're forced to remove it, either for being massively off topic or too disrespectful to allow to stand. We don't just moderate away people expressing their opinions when it's at least reasonably related to the subject.

Flamebait and borderline off-topic are the reasons for moderation, you told the the starter of this thread. The first response in this thread fits that description perfectly.

We allow for more open discussion here than in other threads. If we make it a habit of deleting posts here, then it gives credibility to users who scream about us censoring them regardless of our justification. You don't need to agree with me, but hopefully you understand why it's important that we limit our moderation of this forum to removing posts or threads only when it's absolutely necessary.

If you look at the recent postings in non-av, there is a lot of what I consider flamebait, yet the posts have not been deleted. Most posters who are not of the a particular opinion have just stopped posting, turning non-av into an echo chamber. Just my observation and opinion.

bpatus297 wrote:

If you look at the recent postings in non-av, there is a lot of what I consider flamebait, yet the posts have not been deleted. Most posters who are not of the a particular opinion have just stopped posting, turning non-av into an echo chamber. Just my observation and opinion.

We mention this regularly — we cannot read every thread, and we rely on users to report posts to us. We're volunteers (we have jobs, families, and social lives), and there aren't very many of us. There's no conceivable way that we will be able to read every post and every thread. If you see an issue, please report it so that it flags the comment for us to review. Post can be reported for any reason when users feel that our attention needs to be brought to something.

atcsundevil wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

If you look at the recent postings in non-av, there is a lot of what I consider flamebait, yet the posts have not been deleted. Most posters who are not of the a particular opinion have just stopped posting, turning non-av into an echo chamber. Just my observation and opinion.

We mention this regularly — we cannot read every thread, and we rely on users to report posts to us. We're volunteers (we have jobs, families, and social lives), and there aren't very many of us. There's no conceivable way that we will be able to read every post and every thread. If you see an issue, please report it so that it flags the comment for us to review. Post can be reported for any reason when users feel that our attention needs to be brought to something.

I understand you can't and don't read every thread. I really try not to report threads, rather just ignore the chaff. I was just making an observation.

bpatus297 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

If you look at the recent postings in non-av, there is a lot of what I consider flamebait, yet the posts have not been deleted. Most posters who are not of the a particular opinion have just stopped posting, turning non-av into an echo chamber. Just my observation and opinion.

We mention this regularly — we cannot read every thread, and we rely on users to report posts to us. We're volunteers (we have jobs, families, and social lives), and there aren't very many of us. There's no conceivable way that we will be able to read every post and every thread. If you see an issue, please report it so that it flags the comment for us to review. Post can be reported for any reason when users feel that our attention needs to be brought to something.

I understand you can't and don't read every thread. I really try not to report threads, rather just ignore the chaff. I was just making an observation.

Okay, but at the end of the day, things not reported generally won't be deleted.

bpatus297 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

If you look at the recent postings in non-av, there is a lot of what I consider flamebait, yet the posts have not been deleted. Most posters who are not of the a particular opinion have just stopped posting, turning non-av into an echo chamber. Just my observation and opinion.

We mention this regularly — we cannot read every thread, and we rely on users to report posts to us. We're volunteers (we have jobs, families, and social lives), and there aren't very many of us. There's no conceivable way that we will be able to read every post and every thread. If you see an issue, please report it so that it flags the comment for us to review. Post can be reported for any reason when users feel that our attention needs to be brought to something.

I understand you can't and don't read every thread. I really try not to report threads, rather just ignore the chaff. I was just making an observation.

I'll be honest, it isn't particularly useful for you to say that you notice posts that should be removed, but then more or less say that you aren't interested in helping us to remove them. We don't work for the site, and we're not paid to be here — we're users who have volunteered to take on additional responsibilities, but we need the help of other users to keep this place sane. If you aren't willing to help us, then your observations aren't really of much value to us if we can't act on them. I strongly urge you to reconsider your position on reporting posts. The point isn't to get people in trouble, it's to make sure we can keep threads respectful and constructive. Without the community pitching in to help make that happen, it makes our roles here significantly more difficult.

atcsundevil wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

We mention this regularly — we cannot read every thread, and we rely on users to report posts to us. We're volunteers (we have jobs, families, and social lives), and there aren't very many of us. There's no conceivable way that we will be able to read every post and every thread. If you see an issue, please report it so that it flags the comment for us to review. Post can be reported for any reason when users feel that our attention needs to be brought to something.

I understand you can't and don't read every thread. I really try not to report threads, rather just ignore the chaff. I was just making an observation.

I'll be honest, it isn't particularly useful for you to say that you notice posts that should be removed, but then more or less say that you aren't interested in helping us to remove them. We don't work for the site, and we're not paid to be here — we're users who have volunteered to take on additional responsibilities, but we need the help of other users to keep this place sane. If you aren't willing to help us, then your observations aren't really of much value to us if we can't act on them. I strongly urge you to reconsider your position on reporting posts. The point isn't to get people in trouble, it's to make sure we can keep threads respectful and constructive. Without the community pitching in to help make that happen, it makes our roles here significantly more difficult.

I'm an adult and like to let others have their opinions. As such, I can overlook or ignore when people make ignorant statements. I don't need to someone to create a safe space for me. I am not talking about blatant violations like someone being openly racist, rather a lot of what falls under "flamebait". That is a very subjective term that can be interpreted however the moderator wants to. This thread is about over-moderation in Non-Av, so I think my comments very much are in-line with this discussion. I have said it before and I will say it again, I think the moderations (not all moderators, but the moderation in general) is biased in Non-Av. You also wont get much sympathy from me about being a volunteer, that is your choice. Mods tend to through the volunteer aspect our a lot like they are looking for us to kiss the ring or something, not happening from me. I volunteer for may things and I never tell anyone squat about being a volunteer, it's bad form in my opinion. You can quit at any time.

bpatus297 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

I understand you can't and don't read every thread. I really try not to report threads, rather just ignore the chaff. I was just making an observation.

I'll be honest, it isn't particularly useful for you to say that you notice posts that should be removed, but then more or less say that you aren't interested in helping us to remove them. We don't work for the site, and we're not paid to be here — we're users who have volunteered to take on additional responsibilities, but we need the help of other users to keep this place sane. If you aren't willing to help us, then your observations aren't really of much value to us if we can't act on them. I strongly urge you to reconsider your position on reporting posts. The point isn't to get people in trouble, it's to make sure we can keep threads respectful and constructive. Without the community pitching in to help make that happen, it makes our roles here significantly more difficult.

I'm an adult and like to let others have their opinions. As such, I can overlook or ignore when people make ignorant statements. I don't need to someone to create a safe space for me. I am not talking about blatant violations like someone being openly racist, rather a lot of what falls under "flamebait". That is a very subjective term that can be interpreted however the moderator wants to. This thread is about over-moderation in Non-Av, so I think my comments very much are in-line with this discussion. I have said it before and I will say it again, I think the moderations (not all moderators, but the moderation in general) is biased in Non-Av. You also wont get much sympathy from me about being a volunteer, that is your choice. Mods tend to through the volunteer aspect our a lot like they are looking for us to kiss the ring or something, not happening from me. I volunteer for may things and I never tell anyone squat about being a volunteer, it's bad form in my opinion. You can quit at any time.

Your high bar for employing empathy is noted.

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

I'll be honest, it isn't particularly useful for you to say that you notice posts that should be removed, but then more or less say that you aren't interested in helping us to remove them. We don't work for the site, and we're not paid to be here — we're users who have volunteered to take on additional responsibilities, but we need the help of other users to keep this place sane. If you aren't willing to help us, then your observations aren't really of much value to us if we can't act on them. I strongly urge you to reconsider your position on reporting posts. The point isn't to get people in trouble, it's to make sure we can keep threads respectful and constructive. Without the community pitching in to help make that happen, it makes our roles here significantly more difficult.

I'm an adult and like to let others have their opinions. As such, I can overlook or ignore when people make ignorant statements. I don't need to someone to create a safe space for me. I am not talking about blatant violations like someone being openly racist, rather a lot of what falls under "flamebait". That is a very subjective term that can be interpreted however the moderator wants to. This thread is about over-moderation in Non-Av, so I think my comments very much are in-line with this discussion. I have said it before and I will say it again, I think the moderations (not all moderators, but the moderation in general) is biased in Non-Av. You also wont get much sympathy from me about being a volunteer, that is your choice. Mods tend to through the volunteer aspect our a lot like they are looking for us to kiss the ring or something, not happening from me. I volunteer for may things and I never tell anyone squat about being a volunteer, it's bad form in my opinion. You can quit at any time.

Your high bar for employing empathy is noted.

Why? Because I am tired of hearing moderators fall back on the "but we are volunteers" line every time something they do is questioned?

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

I'm an adult and like to let others have their opinions. As such, I can overlook or ignore when people make ignorant statements. I don't need to someone to create a safe space for me. I am not talking about blatant violations like someone being openly racist, rather a lot of what falls under "flamebait". That is a very subjective term that can be interpreted however the moderator wants to. This thread is about over-moderation in Non-Av, so I think my comments very much are in-line with this discussion. I have said it before and I will say it again, I think the moderations (not all moderators, but the moderation in general) is biased in Non-Av. You also wont get much sympathy from me about being a volunteer, that is your choice. Mods tend to through the volunteer aspect our a lot like they are looking for us to kiss the ring or something, not happening from me. I volunteer for may things and I never tell anyone squat about being a volunteer, it's bad form in my opinion. You can quit at any time.

Your high bar for employing empathy is noted.

Why? Because I am tired of hearing moderators fall back on the "but we are volunteers" line every time something they do is questioned?

That wasn't really the point. There's a system in place - it wasn't used, but a complaint lodged nonetheless. For people already doing a largely thankless task, not using the system but complaining anyway isn't helping - was the point.

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

I'm an adult and like to let others have their opinions. As such, I can overlook or ignore when people make ignorant statements. I don't need to someone to create a safe space for me. I am not talking about blatant violations like someone being openly racist, rather a lot of what falls under "flamebait". That is a very subjective term that can be interpreted however the moderator wants to. This thread is about over-moderation in Non-Av, so I think my comments very much are in-line with this discussion. I have said it before and I will say it again, I think the moderations (not all moderators, but the moderation in general) is biased in Non-Av. You also wont get much sympathy from me about being a volunteer, that is your choice. Mods tend to through the volunteer aspect our a lot like they are looking for us to kiss the ring or something, not happening from me. I volunteer for may things and I never tell anyone squat about being a volunteer, it's bad form in my opinion. You can quit at any time.

Your high bar for employing empathy is noted.

Why? Because I am tired of hearing moderators fall back on the "but we are volunteers" line every time something they do is questioned?

If you're not going to help, then your complaining is wasting everyone's time.

atcsundevil wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Your high bar for employing empathy is noted.

Why? Because I am tired of hearing moderators fall back on the "but we are volunteers" line every time something they do is questioned?

If you're not going to help, then your complaining is wasting everyone's time.

I guess you want me to just go shut up and sit in the corner now.

Over the years, I've heard a similar variation on the same theme. I'm seeing flamebait in Non-Av, people who think like me have left the site, it's not fair or conducive to an open discussion, but at the same time, I won't help the moderators out by reporting offending posts. I don't understand it. I'll be frank, I've largely stopped looking at Non-Av outside of inspecting reported posts because it's often a dumpster fire. Therefore, I rely heavily on users to report offending posts. If you're not going to do that, but still want to complain about it, then how does that help the situation in the slightest?

I'll also say what I've been saying for a long time. This is an aviation site. If a users big concern is supposedly biased moderation in the Non-Av forum, then that user should probably reevaluate their membership on this site. There are plenty of politics focused websites to choose from.

bpatus297 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Why? Because I am tired of hearing moderators fall back on the "but we are volunteers" line every time something they do is questioned?

If you're not going to help, then your complaining is wasting everyone's time.

I guess you want me to just go shut up and sit in the corner now.

You want to complain, but not offer any solutions or help with the issue. Instead, you tell me I can quit. Very helpful. We remind people that we're volunteers because a lot of people wrongly think that we're paid to be here. I'm an air traffic controller at one of the busiest facilities in the world, so I guess I thought that I might be able to offer something here in addition to volunteering my time. Go ahead and spare me the ridicule unless you're able to bring something to the table. I'm not big on people who lack initiative but still want to moan about everything, so if you thought you'd get some other response from me, I guess you're wrong. So, complain all you want, but I'm tired of hearing people whine about things that they can help fix but then make a list of reasons why they don't want to. Unless you want to help address the issue, then you're the one putting yourself in the corner, not me.

OA412 wrote:

Over the years, I've heard a similar variation on the same theme. I'm seeing flamebait in Non-Av, people who think like me have left the site, it's not fair or conducive to an open discussion, but at the same time, I won't help the moderators out by reporting offending posts. I don't understand it. I'll be frank, I've largely stopped looking at Non-Av outside of inspecting reported posts because it's often a dumpster fire. Therefore, I rely heavily on users to report offending posts. If you're not going to do that, but still want to complain about it, then how does that help the situation in the slightest?

I'll also say what I've been saying for a long time. This is an aviation site. If a users big concern is supposedly biased moderation in the Non-Av forum, then that user should probably reevaluate their membership on this site. There are plenty of politics focused websites to choose from.

I can't take people seriously when they're complaining about perceived political biases from the moderation in Non Av. To be biased against them would mean to imply that I cared about the conversation to begin with, which I very much do not. I, like many people, have always come to this site to talk about airplanes, and the idea that one would go to a place called "Airliners" to engage in political diatribe absolutely mystifies me. Non Av has been a cesspool for years regardless of the time or effort we put into it, and I think we all avoid it wherever possible now, because I think we all feel that the forum isn't in the spirit of the mission of this site. If people want to complain about it, then so be it, but unless they report posts or sign up to be a moderator, it's all wasted bandwidth...it's certainly a lost effort on me unless they want to pitch in and help.

atcsundevil wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

If you're not going to help, then your complaining is wasting everyone's time.

I guess you want me to just go shut up and sit in the corner now.

You want to complain, but not offer any solutions or help with the issue. Instead, you tell me I can quit. Very helpful. We remind people that we're volunteers because a lot of people wrongly think that we're paid to be here. I'm an air traffic controller at one of the busiest facilities in the world, so I guess I thought that I might be able to offer something here in addition to volunteering my time. Go ahead and spare me the ridicule unless you're able to bring something to the table. I'm not big on people who lack initiative but still want to moan about everything, so if you thought you'd get some other response from me, I guess you're wrong. So, complain all you want, but I'm tired of hearing people whine about things that they can help fix but then make a list of reasons why they don't want to. Unless you want to help address the issue, then you're the one putting yourself in the corner, not me.

OA412 wrote:

Over the years, I've heard a similar variation on the same theme. I'm seeing flamebait in Non-Av, people who think like me have left the site, it's not fair or conducive to an open discussion, but at the same time, I won't help the moderators out by reporting offending posts. I don't understand it. I'll be frank, I've largely stopped looking at Non-Av outside of inspecting reported posts because it's often a dumpster fire. Therefore, I rely heavily on users to report offending posts. If you're not going to do that, but still want to complain about it, then how does that help the situation in the slightest?

I'll also say what I've been saying for a long time. This is an aviation site. If a users big concern is supposedly biased moderation in the Non-Av forum, then that user should probably reevaluate their membership on this site. There are plenty of politics focused websites to choose from.

I can't take people seriously when they're complaining about perceived political biases from the moderation in Non Av. To be biased against them would mean to imply that I cared about the conversation to begin with, which I very much do not. I, like many people, have always come to this site to talk about airplanes, and the idea that one would go to a place called "Airliners" to engage in political diatribe absolutely mystifies me. Non Av has been a cesspool for years regardless of the time or effort we put into it, and I think we all avoid it wherever possible now, because I think we all feel that the forum isn't in the spirit of the mission of this site. If people want to complain about it, then so be it, but unless they report posts or sign up to be a moderator, it's all wasted bandwidth...it's certainly a lost effort on me unless they want to pitch in and help.

I'm not complaining, I was agreeing with the OP. I don't need a solution, I am not a moderator. The premise is that Non-Av is over moderated, I agreed and now you are arguing with me telling me to report more so the moderators can do their volunteer duty to delete posts. I don't want more deletions, I want less. I am an adult that can ignore ignorant statements, I don't need you policing Non-Av for me. I am glad you work at a busy ATC, I hope you enjoy it. Maybe people like myself come here to read about planes, but then go to Non-Av to see what else is going on around the world vs going to another forum. Its not your job to worry about why people come here and post in Non-Av, why worry about what other people do?

bpatus297 wrote:

The premise is that Non-Av is over moderated, I agreed and now you are arguing with me telling me to report more so the moderators can do their volunteer duty to delete posts. I don't want more deletions, I want less. I am an adult that can ignore ignorant statements, I don't need you policing Non-Av for me.

That's the second time you've made it clear to me that you are, indeed, an adult. We get it. Although, and maybe this is a spoiler, but...we all are.

We don't police anything for you. We make an effort here for the benefit of the community. We were here before you, and we'll be here after you're gone, so unless you decide you want to provide a benefit to this community, then frankly I can't take your observations seriously.

As someone who was here in these forums as far back as 2004, I can attest that moderators have always been leftist leaning and unfair. Its just the way it is, as most aviation fans are not just leftists, but hard core socialists who cannot get a sentence go by without wanting to arrest Donald Trump, and before him, George W. Bush.

The years have not gotten better, but far, far worse. At least in 2004, there were some moderators and members who would enjoy the jousting that came with political discussions and allowed you to insult them and so on back and forth. Now, like most things in life, cancel culture is in full swing, so conservatives have just given up on the non-aviation forum, as it is useless to even respond before someone just wants a conservative banned for the same language that the leftists say.

I'm not asking nor am I expecting any change. But this message is strictly for those who say it's just better to avoid the non-aviation forum. I agree with you, for whatever your reason. Either you allow a free for all (I don't mind that at all, as I can defend myself easily), or just make this a leftist garden as presently constructed. In the end, who cares. I'll stick to reading the aviation and trip reports segments quietly.

texdravid wrote:

As someone who was here in these forums as far back as 2004, I can attest that moderators have always been leftist leaning and unfair. Its just the way it is, as most aviation fans are not just leftists, but hard core socialists who cannot get a sentence go by without wanting to arrest Donald Trump, and before him, George W. Bush.

The years have not gotten better, but far, far worse. At least in 2004, there were some moderators and members who would enjoy the jousting that came with political discussions and allowed you to insult them and so on back and forth. Now, like most things in life, cancel culture is in full swing, so conservatives have just given up on the non-aviation forum, as it is useless to even respond before someone just wants a conservative banned for the same language that the leftists say.

I'm not asking nor am I expecting any change. But this message is strictly for those who say it's just better to avoid the non-aviation forum. I agree with you, for whatever your reason. Either you allow a free for all (I don't mind that at all, as I can defend myself easily), or just make this a leftist garden as presently constructed. In the end, who cares. I'll stick to reading the aviation and trip reports segments quietly.

This entire post is absolutely asinine to the point of absurdity.

texdravid wrote:

As someone who was here in these forums as far back as 2004, I can attest that moderators have always been leftist leaning and unfair. Its just the way it is, as most aviation fans are not just leftists, but hard core socialists who cannot get a sentence go by without wanting to arrest Donald Trump, and before him, George W. Bush.

The years have not gotten better, but far, far worse. At least in 2004, there were some moderators and members who would enjoy the jousting that came with political discussions and allowed you to insult them and so on back and forth. Now, like most things in life, cancel culture is in full swing, so conservatives have just given up on the non-aviation forum, as it is useless to even respond before someone just wants a conservative banned for the same language that the leftists say.

I'm not asking nor am I expecting any change. But this message is strictly for those who say it's just better to avoid the non-aviation forum. I agree with you, for whatever your reason. Either you allow a free for all (I don't mind that at all, as I can defend myself easily), or just make this a leftist garden as presently constructed. In the end, who cares. I'll stick to reading the aviation and trip reports segments quietly.

I joined in 2001 and remember some absolutely foul and caustic crap being flung, especially between 2002-3. The judgment at that time was that as an international meeting place for people supposedly all interested in the same thing, a little more decorum would be asked for. It was mostly Americans of a certain predisposition who took exception to that. You can feel however you like, but rewriting history here is another thing. A lot of us here have tried to keep fairness and engagement as high priorities, but go on painting the mods and everyone else with that broad brush.

texdravid wrote:

As someone who was here in these forums as far back as 2004, I can attest that moderators have always been leftist leaning and unfair. Its just the way it is, as most aviation fans are not just leftists, but hard core socialists who cannot get a sentence go by without wanting to arrest Donald Trump, and before him, George W. Bush.

The years have not gotten better, but far, far worse. At least in 2004, there were some moderators and members who would enjoy the jousting that came with political discussions and allowed you to insult them and so on back and forth. Now, like most things in life, cancel culture is in full swing, so conservatives have just given up on the non-aviation forum, as it is useless to even respond before someone just wants a conservative banned for the same language that the leftists say.

I'm not asking nor am I expecting any change. But this message is strictly for those who say it's just better to avoid the non-aviation forum. I agree with you, for whatever your reason. Either you allow a free for all (I don't mind that at all, as I can defend myself easily), or just make this a leftist garden as presently constructed. In the end, who cares. I'll stick to reading the aviation and trip reports segments quietly.

Being unable to respond to someone without insulting them sounds like a "you" problem, frankly.

texdravid wrote:

Its just the way it is, as most aviation fans are not just leftists, but hard core socialists

This is ridiculous. I would think that aviation fans are rather conservative. Let’s think about it: an aviation fan sitting together with his hardcore socialist friends, checking his watch and saying „oh, I have to leave, I want to see the private jet of X, Y, Z because it‘s still missing in my collection“…

Ah, okay, you might respond „he will do it secretly“…

I am wasting my time. Thank you for calling me hardcore socialist. This was a new experience for me.

atcsundevil wrote:

AeroVega wrote:

dutchspotter1 wrote:

Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.

I think this is a perfect example of a comment that take takes a thread off-topic. The topic of this thread is moderation of the non-av forum, not why that forum exists. If anything, this comment should have been moderated away, but as we can see above, the opposite has happened.

Having said that, I do appreciate the jobs the moderators do, especially in the non-av forum. I have learned that sometimes my post just disappears, especially when it is about a sensitive topic. You learn over time what those sensitive topics are and adjust your posts accordingly.

[...] We don't just moderate away people expressing their opinions when it's at least reasonably related to the subject.

You actually do. We just had a post of Noshow deleted (Air France safety thread) which was controversial but on topic and reasonably formulated. It disappeared along with the discussion.

But it seems more people are happy with what you moderate than not. That in itself gives you the benefit of the doubt, I guess.

Nicoeddf wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

AeroVega wrote:

I think this is a perfect example of a comment that take takes a thread off-topic. The topic of this thread is moderation of the non-av forum, not why that forum exists. If anything, this comment should have been moderated away, but as we can see above, the opposite has happened.

Having said that, I do appreciate the jobs the moderators do, especially in the non-av forum. I have learned that sometimes my post just disappears, especially when it is about a sensitive topic. You learn over time what those sensitive topics are and adjust your posts accordingly.

[...] We don't just moderate away people expressing their opinions when it's at least reasonably related to the subject.

You actually do. We just had a post of Noshow deleted (Air France safety thread) which was controversial but on topic and reasonably formulated. It disappeared along with the discussion.

But it seems more people are happy with what you moderate than not. That in itself gives you the benefit of the doubt, I guess.

There were a few posts in this thread which were violating forum rules, subsequently all posts which were referencing to these posts had to be deleted as well as we do not edit posts.

I can only recomment before making accusations as you just did above, simply write a mail to moderators@airliners.net and ask why your post has been deleted.

SQ22 wrote:

Nicoeddf wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

[...] We don't just moderate away people expressing their opinions when it's at least reasonably related to the subject.

You actually do. We just had a post of Noshow deleted (Air France safety thread) which was controversial but on topic and reasonably formulated. It disappeared along with the discussion.

But it seems more people are happy with what you moderate than not. That in itself gives you the benefit of the doubt, I guess.

There were a few posts in this thread which were violating forum rules, subsequently all posts which were referencing to these posts had to be deleted as well as we do not edit posts.

I can only recomment before making accusations as you just did above, simply write a mail to moderators@airliners.net and ask why your post has been deleted.

I know how your moderation mechanism works.
And I don’t care to write you guys an email, I am afraid.

It is a sad state of affairs one way or the other.

One of mine, on topic, no rules broken that I can fathom.
Maybe no link? Not needed for that one and of course I NEVER provide those, do I.

FTS.

GDB wrote:

One of mine, on topic, no rules broken that I can fathom.
Maybe no link? Not needed for that one and of course I NEVER provide those, do I.

FTS.

Same reason as stated above. Referencing to a post which was violating forum rules. Again write a mail to moderators@airliners.net.

I know deletion notifications would be much better but we are not getting them back.

I came to the conclusion that it’s safer to reply in threads without quoting anyone. Sometimes quoting someone is like pulling a Trojan horse into your fortress. :-/

SQ22 wrote:

GDB wrote:

One of mine, on topic, no rules broken that I can fathom.
Maybe no link? Not needed for that one and of course I NEVER provide those, do I.

FTS.

Same reason as stated above. Referencing to a post which was violating forum rules. Again write a mail to moderators@airliners.net.

I know deletion notifications would be much better but we are not getting them back.

I was well aware of the post, it was not as far as I can see breaking any rules, the one I was responding to was on topic, with links and much more light than heat involved.
Nor was the one it was itself a response to.
I think most reasonable people can see the difference between flame bait and robust discussion, clearly I am mistaken or have just been on here way too long.

In the end more members just won’t bother with such arbitrariness.
Plenty of really informed ones have, they tend to be the ones you lose.

What’s the rule on just posting links with little or no comment?
Seems to be the only way to proceed without getting deleted for something you haven’t even done.

GDB wrote:

I was well aware of the post, it was not as far as I can see breaking any rules, the one I was responding to was on topic, with links and much more light than heat involved.
Nor was the one it was itself a response to.
I think most reasonable people can see the difference between flame bait and robust discussion, clearly I am mistaken or have just been on here way too long.

In the end more members just won’t bother with such arbitrariness.
Plenty of really informed ones have, they tend to be the ones you lose.

What’s the rule on just posting links with little or no comment?
Seems to be the only way to proceed without getting deleted for something you haven’t even done.

You were replying to a post who was replying to a post who was replying to a post which was violating forum rules. Again I understand the frustration, but as we do not edit posts, posts which are referencing to a post which is violating forum rules, they have to be deleted as well. As we do not follow each and every thread every time we have to rely on the users to use the reporting function and in case no one is using it until we discover it, several posts will have to be deleted.

Just posting a link with little or without any own comment is violating forum rules.

SQ22 wrote:

GDB wrote:

I was well aware of the post, it was not as far as I can see breaking any rules, the one I was responding to was on topic, with links and much more light than heat involved.
Nor was the one it was itself a response to.
I think most reasonable people can see the difference between flame bait and robust discussion, clearly I am mistaken or have just been on here way too long.

In the end more members just won’t bother with such arbitrariness.
Plenty of really informed ones have, they tend to be the ones you lose.

What’s the rule on just posting links with little or no comment?
Seems to be the only way to proceed without getting deleted for something you haven’t even done.

You were replying to a post who was replying to a post who was replying to a post which was violating forum rules. Again I understand the frustration, but as we do not edit posts, posts which are referencing to a post which is violating forum rules, they have to be deleted as well. As we do not follow each and every thread every time we have to rely on the users to use the reporting function and in case no one is using it until we discover it, several posts will have to be deleted.

Just posting a link with little or without any own comment is violating forum rules.

Well I have posted a link, in that thread in particular, with a sentence, or just a few words, plenty of times. They still seem to be there.
As the link tends to speak for itself. I try to avoid ones I regard as themselves flame bait or just not credible, as well as being accessible without a paywall or any other requirement for membership.
Unless you are on here something like 24/7 how to expect a three or four times removed post, up the thread, which the one in question I recall and not for being an obvious violation, like I said there should be a difference between robust discussion and flame bait.

GDB wrote:

Well I have posted a link, in that thread in particular, with a sentence, or just a few words, plenty of times. They still seem to be there.
As the link tends to speak for itself. I try to avoid ones I regard as themselves flame bait or just not credible, as well as being accessible without a paywall or any other requirement for membership.
Unless you are on here something like 24/7 how to expect a three or four times removed post, up the thread, which the one in question I recall and not for being an obvious violation, like I said there should be a difference between robust discussion and flame bait.

in this case I can only recommend to contact us by mail to moderators@airliners.net, mabye we are speaking about two different deletions.

N14AZ wrote:

I came to the conclusion that it’s safer to reply in threads without quoting anyone. Sometimes quoting someone is like pulling a Trojan horse into your fortress. :-/

Yes, I agree with that, it’s much better to reply with @whoever saying whatever earlier.

But the talk of fortresses just makes me think why bother replying at all. It has turned into a silly overdone war in most topics. Surely there are better things to do that going around in circles on a political debate that will never ever be won?

Silly circle debates is a feature, not a bug on Anet. It doesn’t matter the forum or discussion. There are members who will argue the most pedantic points forever, no matter the evidence presented, just to argue.

Wow, it’s been a minute. Looks like not a lot has changed since I last moderated. Cheers!

You might as well get rid of rid of non aviation.
The reasoning of ‘off topic’ is now frankly silly, it has got insultingly narrow, if the issue is constraints on moderation then save yourselves the effort and stop pretending that you allow discussion that in that area, will inevitably deviate more than the aviation subjects.

atcsundevil wrote:

cpd wrote:

I agree with you. Not that it means anything.

Some of the topics are just to the point of why reply at all.

It has gotten really nasty with the fly-by trolling at a level that used to not exist.

I just hate seeing the nastiness and disrespect. It's why I wanted to become a moderator in the first place — to at least attempt to reign some of that in. Unfortunately it's a losing battle, especially in the divisive political environment that's existed in recent years. So much of that bleeds over into the aviation forums, which I believe detracts from the spirit of this site. I feel like we're not supposed to be here to debate partisan politics, we're supposed to be here to talk about airplanes. Aviation and politics can become intertwined of course, but it just doesn't need the rhetoric and vitriol that are so often injected into discussions. I appreciate that the majority of users here do engage respectfully and are here for the right reasons, but the notorious minority seems to be trying awful hard to spoil the party for everyone else.

Well the mods have certainly been busy with me these past few days, none of what you describe and I agree with, was anywhere near present on the deleted posts, indeed ones that border on what you mention are there, certain users post only snark, still there.
One wasn't even in Non Aviation, I did get a warning and instructions a few weeks ago to contact via the mod email, the mods never bothered to reply.
So here I am posting this.

Maybe some were due to what I call the Jenga Effect, one breaks the rules and others that don't also get deleted.
But with zero engagement back to users it's hard to say.
Away from Non Av, there was an extremely useful and informative thread in Mil/Space, on the F-35, one user posted always useful and informative info, one day gone.
I asked around, the user got all sorts of negative stuff and just left, that's not excessive moderation, that's no moderation.

GDB wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

cpd wrote:

I agree with you. Not that it means anything.

Some of the topics are just to the point of why reply at all.

It has gotten really nasty with the fly-by trolling at a level that used to not exist.

I just hate seeing the nastiness and disrespect. It's why I wanted to become a moderator in the first place — to at least attempt to reign some of that in. Unfortunately it's a losing battle, especially in the divisive political environment that's existed in recent years. So much of that bleeds over into the aviation forums, which I believe detracts from the spirit of this site. I feel like we're not supposed to be here to debate partisan politics, we're supposed to be here to talk about airplanes. Aviation and politics can become intertwined of course, but it just doesn't need the rhetoric and vitriol that are so often injected into discussions. I appreciate that the majority of users here do engage respectfully and are here for the right reasons, but the notorious minority seems to be trying awful hard to spoil the party for everyone else.

Well the mods have certainly been busy with me these past few days, none of what you describe and I agree with, was anywhere near present on the deleted posts, indeed ones that border on what you mention are there, certain users post only snark, still there.
One wasn't even in Non Aviation, I did get a warning and instructions a few weeks ago to contact via the mod email, the mods never bothered to reply.
So here I am posting this.

Maybe some were due to what I call the Jenga Effect, one breaks the rules and others that don't also get deleted.
But with zero engagement back to users it's hard to say.
Away from Non Av, there was an extremely useful and informative thread in Mil/Space, on the F-35, one user posted always useful and informative info, one day gone.
I asked around, the user got all sorts of negative stuff and just left, that's not excessive moderation, that's no moderation.

I'm not really sure what you're talking about, but if something needs to be deleted and hasn't been, then odds are we don't know about it. We miss things unless they're reported to us. Some people refuse to report things, but then love to complain about what a terrible job we're doing. All we can ask is for people to help us out rather than expecting something to happen.

Here is a prime example of what GDB is speaking of:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1475741&p=23494175#p23494175

The post is shut down because:

This thread has devolved into a serious of personal comments and arguments, and will be locked.

Yet looking at all the posts over the last month reveals not a single personal attack (unless an attack on Fox News or Sky News is considered a 'personal comment').
And most of the comments were in agreement, there was a single post which occurred three days ago that possibly put up an opposing opinion from most of the rest.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1475741&p=23494175#p23490121

Yet in another thread the same moderator sees no issue with an actual personal attack/insult.
viewtopic.php?p=23494289#p23493707

The message I'm left with is, 'Thou shall not rebut right wingers or rabid militants, and Thou shall not criticize right wing news media'.
I will add I believe that in the end, my making this post will cost me my posting privileges here on A.net.

Vintage wrote:

Here is a prime example of what GDB is speaking of:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1475741&p=23494175#p23494175

The post is shut down because:

This thread has devolved into a serious of personal comments and arguments, and will be locked.

Yet looking at all the posts over the last month reveals not a single personal attack (unless an attack on Fox News or Sky News is considered a 'personal comment').
And most of the comments were in agreement, there was a single post which occurred three days ago that possibly put up an opposing opinion from most of the rest.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1475741&p=23494175#p23490121

Yet in another thread the same moderator sees no issue with an actual personal attack/insult.
viewtopic.php?p=23494289#p23493707

The message I'm left with is, 'Thou shall not rebut right wingers or rabid militants, and Thou shall not criticize right wing news media'.
I will add I believe that in the end, my making this post will cost me my posting privileges here on A.net.

The thread was locked because of personal attacks — you don't see them because they were deleted. That's kind of the whole point. We don't try to keep threads alive when they become too much effort for us to keep cordial. That thread had a dozen deletions on the second page alone, which is why you aren't seeing anything.

Someone saying "stop using silly comparisons" isn't a personal attack, it's that user's opinion of your assessment. The user isn't attacking you as a person. I'll agree that it's walking a line, but discussions and debates often involve defending your position.

You can criticize whatever media you want. I'm not sure why you think I would care about that, so long as it's in line with forum rules. You are apparently making assumptions on my own personal political views by implying that I'm a defender of right wing media, but the point is that I've never made my own personal political views apparent on this forum for this exact reason. I've been accused of defending left wing media, I've been called a communist, a fascist, a racist, pro Boeing, pro Airbus, anti American.. Believe me, I've heard it all. So, let's just dispense with the assumptions and go on facts. You don't have the full picture to assess my rationale for locking the first thread, and I doubt you would consider the "personal attack/insult" to be a personal attack or insult if viewing it on an independent basis. I can assure you that I have no problem coming down on users engaging in personal attacks, but I'm simply not seeing it here.

I don't know why you think this post would cost you your privileges here. I'm not here to shut you up or belittle you. I'm happy to answer your questions, but I would appreciate if you wouldn't make assumptions about my motivations. Just ask your questions, and I'll answer what I can within our own policies. I have no problem justifying my actions.

atcsundevil wrote:

Vintage wrote:

Here is a prime example of what GDB is speaking of:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1475741&p=23494175#p23494175

The post is shut down because:

This thread has devolved into a serious of personal comments and arguments, and will be locked.

Yet looking at all the posts over the last month reveals not a single personal attack (unless an attack on Fox News or Sky News is considered a 'personal comment').
And most of the comments were in agreement, there was a single post which occurred three days ago that possibly put up an opposing opinion from most of the rest.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1475741&p=23494175#p23490121

Yet in another thread the same moderator sees no issue with an actual personal attack/insult.
viewtopic.php?p=23494289#p23493707

The message I'm left with is, 'Thou shall not rebut right wingers or rabid militants, and Thou shall not criticize right wing news media'.
I will add I believe that in the end, my making this post will cost me my posting privileges here on A.net.

The thread was locked because of personal attacks — you don't see them because they were deleted. That's kind of the whole point. We don't try to keep threads alive when they become too much effort for us to keep cordial. That thread had a dozen deletions on the second page alone, which is why you aren't seeing anything.

Someone saying "stop using silly comparisons" isn't a personal attack, it's that user's opinion of your assessment. The user isn't attacking you as a person. I'll agree that it's walking a line, but discussions and debates often involve defending your position.

You can criticize whatever media you want. I'm not sure why you think I would care about that, so long as it's in line with forum rules. You are apparently making assumptions on my own personal political views by implying that I'm a defender of right wing media, but the point is that I've never made my own personal political views apparent on this forum for this exact reason. I've been accused of defending left wing media, I've been called a communist, a fascist, a racist, pro Boeing, pro Airbus, anti American.. Believe me, I've heard it all. So, let's just dispense with the assumptions and go on facts. You don't have the full picture to assess my rationale for locking the first thread, and I doubt you would consider the "personal attack/insult" to be a personal attack or insult if viewing it on an independent basis. I can assure you that I have no problem coming down on users engaging in personal attacks, but I'm simply not seeing it here.

I don't know why you think this post would cost you your privileges here. I'm not here to shut you up or belittle you. I'm happy to answer your questions, but I would appreciate if you wouldn't make assumptions about my motivations. Just ask your questions, and I'll answer what I can within our own policies. I have no problem justifying my actions.

My last post in that thread was deleted. It pointed out that Fox had lied about the stolen election, and that Dominion was attempting to hold them accountable.

I don't think there is any political motivation on behalf of moderators here. But it does seem at times a bit random, as to what is allowed and what isn't. I thought my post was truthful and on topic. It didn't attack anyone other than Fox, but did so factually. So was surprised to see it deleted.

I do understand that the overhead of moderating a contentious thread might warrant locking it. And maybe it's necessary to delete a block of posts referring to a specific problematic post, so perhaps my post was caught up in that.

The only thing I would point out, is that the net effect is that people making extreme assertions will generate a vigorous response, and if the thread is locked because of that, the persons doing so have outsized control over the topic. That is the only real concern I have. I think that is frustrating for some of us.

Just my opinion, for what it's worth.